at the place of residence of the persons bound by such recognizance as therein described, to appear before the judge at the place where such trial is to be had.

Origin] Sec. 779, Code of 1892; 53 Vict., Can., ch. 37, sec. 29.

Recognizance to prosecute or give evidence]-See secs. 688, 692, 1094. Sec. 840 refers in terms only to sec. 692, and it is an open question whether a private prosecutor who has been bound over at his own request when the magistrate discharged the accused and who thereafter has preferred an indictment by leave of the court, may not, on defendant's election of trial under Part XVIII without a jury, consider his obligation under his recognizance at an end. He may, of course, be subpoenaed by the Crown prosecutor to give evidence, but his recognizance under sec. 688 was merely to "prefer and prosecute an indictment." If the recognizance be given under sec. 692, then sec. 840 operates as a statutory extension of the obligation so as to make it apply to Part XVIII subject to the proviso it contains. It is at least doubtful whether the like extension can be attached to sec. 688.

Witnesses to attend throughout trial.—Default or contempt of court. 841. Every witness, whether on behalf of the prisoner or against him, duly summoned or subpoenaed to attend and give evidence before the judge sitting on any such trial on the day appointed for the same shall be bound to attend and remain in attendance throughout the trial.

2. If he fails so to attend he shall be held guilty of contempt of court, and may be proceeded against therefor accordingly. Origin]-Sec. 780, Code of 1892; 52 Vict., Can., ch. 47, sec. 18.

Warrant may issue for witness.-Detention thereunder or release on recognizance. Contempt.-Penalty.-Forms.

842. Upon proof to the satisfaction of the judge of the service of a subpoena, upon any witness who fails to attend before him as required by such subpoena, and upon such judge being satisfied that the presence of such witness before him is indispensable to the ends of justice, he may, by his warrant, cause the said witness to be apprehended and forthwith brought before him to give evidence as required by such subpoena, and to answer for his disregard of the same.

2. Such witness may be detained on such warrant before the said judge, or in the common gaol, with a view to secure his

1153

presence as a witness; or, in the discretion of the judge, such witness may be released on recognizance with or without sureties, conditioned for his appearance to give evidence as therein mentioned, and to answer for his default in not attending upon the said subpoena, as for a contempt.

3. The judge may, in a summary manner, examine into and dispose of the charge of contempt against any such witness who, if found guilty thereof, may be fined or imprisoned, or both, such a fine not to exceed one hundred dollars, and such imprisonment to be in the common gaol, with or without hard labour, and not to exceed the term of ninety days, and he may also be ordered to pay the costs incident to the execution of such warrant and of his detention in custody.

4. Such warrant may be in form 62 and the conviction for contempt in form 13, and the same shall be authority to the persons and officers therein required to act to do as they are therein, respectively directed.

Origin]-Sec. 781, Code of 1892; 52 Vict., Can., ch. 47, sec. 19.
Subpoena for witnesses]-Code sec. 833.

Form of warrant to apprehend witness]-Code form 62, following sec. 1152.

Form of conviction for contempt]-Code form 13, following sec. 1152.

PART XIX.

PROCEDURE BY INDICTMENT.

General Provisions as to Indictments.

Records, etc., need not be on parchment.

843. It shall not be necessary for any indictment or any record or document relative to any criminal case to be written on parchment.

Origin]-Sec. 608, Code of 1892; R.S.C. 1886, ch. 174, sec. 103.

The indictment]-An indictment is defined to be a written accusation of an offence preferred to and presented upon oath as true by a grand jury at the suit of the Government. If the grand jury are satisfied of the truth of the accusation, they write on the back of the bill "a true bill." The bill is then said to be found, and is publicly returned into court; the party stands indicted, and may then be required to answer the charge against him. R. v. Townsend, 3 Can. Cr. Cas. 29 at 49, 28 N.S.R. 468.

When the jury have made the indorsements on the bills, they bring them publicly into court, and the clerk of the court calls each juryman by name, and then the clerk of the peace or assize asks the jury whether they have agreed upon any bills, and bids them present them to the court. The clerk then reads over the name of the offenders and offences, with the finding of the jury, which is either " a true bill " no bill," as the case may be. R. v. Townsend, supra. Unless the context otherwise requires, "indictment includes an information and presentment, also a formal charge under sec. 873A. See Code sec. 1 (16). It also includes any "record," i.e., the written charge under secs. 825 and 827 of Part XVIII (speedy trials).

or

It is a privilege of the Attorney-General to bring before the grand jury an indictment against any person suspected of being guilty of an offence, and that without there having been any preliminary inquiry or any information whatever before a magistrate. Code sec. 873.

If there has been a valid commitment for trial, an indictment may be based thereupon and presented to the grand jury. The grand jurors hear the witnesses upon this indictment and decide whether or not the accused should be put on trial; they can do this even if the proceedings before the magistrate at the preliminary hearing have not been

regular in every respect. R. v. Morin, (1917) 26 Que. K.B. 428, 28 Can. Cr. Cas. 269.

If it is proposed to read to the grand jury or to the petit jury, on account of absence or illness of a witness, a deposition taken at the preliminary hearing, it may be necessary to show that the deposition has been regularly taken, but for other purposes it is too late to object to the regularity of the deposition because it was not authenticated by the magistrate and the stenographer in conformity with sec. 683, if, following the preliminary hearing, the accused made option under Part XVIII to go before the assizes for a jury trial. R. v. Morin, supra.

Presentation of true bill]-The mere presentation by the grand jurors of a bill forms no part of their deliberations and determination. That is disposed of in the grand jurors' room and the finding there written is simply handed in to the court. Often presiding judges direct that the foreman alone or such number of jurors as directed may do so, without the whole panel appearing. Veronneau v. The King, (1916) 54 S.C.R. 7, 27 Can. Cr. Cas. 211, 216, per Idington, J.

Form of stating offences in indictment]—See Code forms 63 and 64 and Code secs. 852-857.

Two indictments for same offence]-It is unusual and useless to have two indictments for the same offence. The accused can complain of this and demand that the Crown elect between the two indictments and proceed only upon one of them. R. v. Morin, (1917) 26 Que. K.B. 428, 28 Can. Cr. Cas. 269. If he does not make this demand the accused cannot escape the necessity of standing trial before the petit jury because one of the two indictments has not been withdrawn. It is certain that the accused cannot undergo two trials for the same offence. If the Crown thought of making him submit to a new trial upon the other indictment, the accused would succeed on the plea of autrefois acquit or autrefois convict. R. v. Morin, supra. If the accused has suffered no prejudice from the fact that there were two indictments upon which the grand jury found two true bills, leave to appeal will be refused where there has been a trial on one of them only. R. v. Morin, supra.

Special provisions governing trials in Yukon Territory]-See the Yukon Act, R.S.C. 1906, ch. 63, as amended 1907, ch. 53, 1908, ch. 76; 1909, ch. 37; 1912, ch. 56; and Code sec. 9.

Trials at bar]-Trials at bar" before three judges representative of the full court are now unusual. Examples may be found in A. G. v. Bradlaugh, 14 Q.B.D. 695; R. v. Jameson [1896] 2 Q.B. 425, 18 Cox, 392; R. v. Lynch [1903] 1 K.B. 446; R. v. Castro, L.R. 9 Q.B. 350.

Statement of venue in margin of indictment.-Local description. 844. It shall not be necessary to state any venue in the body of any indictment, and the district, county or place named

in the margin thereof shall be the venue for all the facts stated in the body of the indictment.

2. If local description is required such local description shall be given in the body of the indictment.

Origin]-Sec. 609, Code of 1892; R.S.C. 1886, ch. 174, sec. 104; 14-15 Vict., Imp., ch. 100, sec. 23.

Objection to venue]—An objection to the jurisdiction in respect of venue had formerly to be raised by a special plea to the indictment. R. v. O'Rourke, 1 Ont. 464, which plea was required to be duly verified by affidavit or otherwise. R. v. Malott (1885), 1 B.C.R., pt. 2, p. 207; Malott v. R. (1886), 1 B.C.R., pt. 2, 212; but sec. 905 abolishes that form of special plea, and any such ground of defence may now be relied on under the plea of not guilty. Section 905 (2). As to jurisdiction of criminal courts, see Code secs. 577-588.

Ordering change of venue]-See sec. 884-887.

If local description is required "1-This refers to offences such as burglary, housebreaking, theft from a dwelling-house, forcible entry, etc., where a more definite locality than the venue must appear in order properly to charge an offence. If the offence be one not requiring local description, it is assumed that the county or district named in the margin of the indictment, and which formerly indicated the district from which the grand jury had been drawn, is the county or district in which the crime was committed. Smitheman v. The King, 35 S.C.R. 490, 9 Can. Cr. Cas. 17.

Jurisdiction]-If the offence be begun in one district and concluded in another, the indictment may be brought in either; R. v. Hogle, 5 Que. Q.B. 59, 5 Can. Cr. Cas. 53; Fournier v. Attorney-General, 19 Que. K.B. 436, 17 Can. Cr. Cas. 108; R. v. O'Gorman, 18 O.L.R. 427, 15 Can. Cr. Cas. 173; or may follow a committal for trial made in the same county on the accused being found or apprehended there, if the crime were committed within the same province. Code see. 577; Fournier v. Attorney-General, 19 Que. K.B. 436, 17 Can. Cr. Cas. 108. Certain technical averments dispensed with in indictment]-See sees. 844-859, 861-869.

Order for particulars]-See secs. 859, 860.

Form of indictment.

845. It shall not be necessary to state in any indictment that the jurors present upon oath or affirmation.

2. It shall be sufficient if an indictment begins according to form 63, or to the like effect.